reading diary not late oh it is late this is my late reading diary

--there are, of course, two types of people in this world, those who think in dualisms, and those who do not....
this, then, this, then, is a journey between trains, a journey in thought between trains, all the tracks connect, and the stops are clearly marked, but there is no way to know how the tracks are going to curve as we go--between one thinker one thought and another, this is a train ride, history and culture are train rides where tracks converge and some of them go to the same stops, the tracks cross, and usually the trains do not crash into each other, but sometimes they certainly do...
but first.
i have seen socially embedded art, and maybe even made some (not much), and have some contexts for having seen this kind of work that i think works, but.  most of the time, when there is an event where the people performing talk about conscience and social change, i try to find reasons to be out of town for a week or so, because, because, i couldn't articulate it very well before, but because, there is that sense of us and them, where we in these scenarios are part of something disenfranchised, and them is part of something that disenfranchises, and then we get to see work about how bad those people are who are disenfranchising, and it seems so very easy, and so very uncomfortable, and incomplete.
instead, thinking with the texts (rather than through them), there are some patterns emerging about the nature of discourse generally, this is very post-structural of course, but the subject object relations through language, and the impossibility of stepping outside the father's narrative, that help illuminate why the us and them cannot hope to undermine anything, and at best, someone in the crowd might be able to think a little more deeply, but probably not really.  so.
it seems as though it's necessary to consider how we might make not only an art of social practice, but a good art of social practice, and this means bringing the aesthetics along, and looking at the very structures of how we travel on the tracks are working.
so we have to travel, because we cannot stand still, we simply cannot stand still.
and next, the tracks:
they are, out of order:
they are out of order.
they are:
HARRISON's notion of dissonance enters through music in terms of structures of harmony, weaving into nazi degenerate art, kandinsky and others playing with harmony in new and unusual ways, the idea of harmony now upset, now something else, now something made to upset, this one and that one, the opposites do not play off each other so easily, or rather, that philosophy of difference, of the other the one that resists the either this or that, in favor of playing against harmony that is rooted somewhere in heraclitus, no, SCHMITT, no, they didn't invent dualisms, of course, but those are the tracks we have to travel on to find out how we got to here, this us, this them, and that question from Billy Bragg, wondering whether the 'man in the mask or the indian is an enemy or a friend of mine'.
and harmony finds its counter or its spherical doubling in coupling and the idea of divine love, in that heavenly spherical way, the union of perfect opposites, that thing called by some masculine and that thing called by some feminine and when they collide, that conflict (is that a conflict? is love a conflict? zizek on lacan, oh he's always on lacan, but that, that violent force that selects this one out of all the other ones? is that conflict?) is not safe, is not so heavenly, is not being treated well by marxist materialisms, that one that one we always see walking with sartre, what is her name? the metro stop named for her was, and it's name was, and her name was BEAUVOIR is running on similar tracks to HARRISON, the other, the feminine, the eternal feminine, the jew, any other who is not the us in the us-them of dis ding, her track is one that traces tracks and ends somewhere at the tip of the nose, that is, on the body, that unsuspecting body, that other in the dualism that negates the self, the mind negates the body in order to justify genocide, does it seem to anyone else that the self-other thing has to come into play after the nation state has committed an atrocity?  and does it seem as though what is also remarkably original about this time (aside from the surveillance, etc.) is that there was a time when the self-other thing was the beginning of the state building toward atrocity, whereas now they/we (we are them, we have met the enemy and he is us) commit the atrocity and then find the discourse, find the self-other thing, to talk about why we did what we had to do?  and it also seems as though there was a time when the nation-state believed the self-other discourse it speaks, and now the state uses the discourse to tell the people why we are at war, and everybody knows that no one representing the nation-state really believes their own words, that it is something else, and something perhaps much much worse? (i read too much zizek and i did not have the proper training in philosophy to put the arguments together correctly)
and there are tracks, there are metro stops going to tracks that are there to lay down foundations, to build structures, or reveal structures, in order that they be revealed as something more concrete than, than, um, in order that they be revealed as concrete.  useful foundations, such as.  KANT's metro car is built with good intentions and even feels a little charming these days, a little naive, but worth the time to admire the scenery and enjoy the company of ghosts who would rather be resting than rolling over in their graves.  and then we have to get off and switch back to BEAVOIR, again, building toward a philosophy of immanence, building toward a becoming not based on the conflict being won by one who is not the other.  MARX&ENGELS, the next stop, is where we will pause and get off and wait for the next train, because for some reason, on this subway line, this stop has the best snacks, but they're expensive (it's what happens when history runs into itself), but here we really should stop and sit on one of the benches and talked about what worked and what didn't work, because truly, they laid down some of the most solid and reasonable foundations, you start with the problem (the spectre) and then begin to build the opposing forces and offer a solution, that should be an angry gesture made with a fist, haha, something like that, something like a manifesto. and it would be good to nap for a very long time, most of the afternoon even, until the rush hour traffic starts to come and we would necessarily be inclined to move, even though perhaps it wouldn't be the worst thing to stop, to just lay for a little bit longer and see what we can build from this, what to build next from this. and only then would anyone in their right mind get up again and perhaps we are wishing by now that the next metro is a merry go round with horses and unicorns but instead there is AGAMBEN and we have to take that, he picks up the notion of state as providing security from SCHMITT and instigates a foucaultian revisiting where terror becomes a necessary ingredient in what might be a dialectic, this certainly sometimes usually often appears to be a dialectic, and if we forget why we were traveling here to begin with, there is the last stop LEDERACH who leads this back to art, this peaceful form, based on harmony and discord, based in a balancing that is never quite one thing against another thing and the collapse of those things into each other, or the towering of one thing over the other, but the balance of things where they talk to each other, is it really just about having a conversation? is this just about learning how to have a proper conversation? (and not a fight or an argument, but a real, civilized conversation)?
(this was not a civilized conversation this was just a monologue)
(out of order, but then perhaps we are out of order, the restaurant is all out of order, and instead of ordering more order, we are ordering something else instead, not chaos, either, something else instead.  the choices on the menu are order and chaos, but we are ordering something else instead)
aha

june-july: decomposing & decompositioning (15 july 14)

this month there is much less to tell.  after finishing the third studio project, i've been getting things ready for this, this trip to europe, traveling in ireland, italy, switzerland, austria (and soon the former czech republic, poland, then berlin).  collecting data from the people in the third project, planning the next one, and putting together the video for the mila kunst exhibition.  that, the video, is unlocking some things about documentation that i like very much.
i am considering the possibility (maybe i wrote about this last month?) of the presentation in plymouth to be an installation with stations, one station for each performer (just the ones who have been in all or nearly all), and collecting their performance selections, interviews, writing and ephemera.  so there would be multiple stations to represent multiple bodies.
oh, also, thinking through the comments from the third reader on the rdc2, and at times i get a glimpse into something useful, but more often it's hard to get through the condescending tone of the thing, along with the suggested further reading list with books i've read and absorbed 20 year ago already.  hm.  that tells me that there's something very elementary in the work that i'm not saying out loud, and i'm not sure what it is yet.
santeria is a system that contains elements of yoruba religion that are very old, but itself is fairly new, less than 200 years old, really, in terms of how it's practiced formally, though it had its birth during the slave trade--as the system that it now is, it's survived through absorbing other traditions, ideas, thoughts, and to me, adding lacan into the list of things it can absorb seems incidental, and not worth going into discussion about colonialism, etc.  it seems divisive, but i understand the implications of ignoring these things as well.  and honestly, i don't think anyone can be inside of it and not think about those things constantly, because it's born from the institution of slavery, inside history and not outside in some eliade-like eden that is above time.  hm.
similarly, feminism, post-feminism, and liberational discourses on otherness also seem embedded in the work, so there is something that i'm not saying, and i think there is a simple way to say it, but first i have to find out exactly what it is that i'm not saying.  i suspect i'll know in a month.
very much looking forward to everything that happens next, yes yes yes

meeting w/laura (12 june 14)

look at: tim infold ; lines, how they intersect, twist go apart come together; double helix-y.  this work is like that, can visualize like that--two strands come together and converge and wrap and unwrap and go in different directions and converge again, etc.  the two sides of the spell-desire equation, sometimes it works together iike they were both together, but even when they are in their own 'domains' they still speak to each other.

next work, next project, talked about the outline of an idea posted in my last blog.  

thinking now to have 1 media projection w/no performers, 2 performers w no media, 2 performers w media.  test to see how spell and media work together, how trance works for each performer.  media enters into image and imaginary, i said oh this is about seeing, but what about hearing and she said, look at that french guy again, voice and gaze as objects of drives. look at what zizek says about this, the orifices of the face, the shadow

also note to self : look at laura's thesis again, on gaze and voice 

lacan's word: exstimacy - inside and outside come together (in voice and gaze)  

--focus for next part, again it's the presenting, how to present, be more willing to experiment in all of this, the presentation of the documentation (geoff's seminar on exposition will help articulate this, the mila kunst exhibition will be good practice for the practice, haha, a pun)

and thinking forward to the last project: she suggests i do something already written, removing myself in all the variables til the last, which will see how this works in a text that is not written for them.

this next work is going to be massively written for these particular performers and their particular abilities in trance.  

so the last one will be how this method might work outside of this context.  mm hm. mm hm.

yes.

on fire,

c

may-june: whispers & mirrors (11 june 14)

a little early, not too early, a little ready, not too ready.
bittersweet residency, some sad things, hidden under the tongue, they slip out, a little late, not too late.

start over.

dear diary,
i finished my rdc2 submission, and i like it.  i think the argument is there, finally, i didn't know what i was arguing for the longest time, but i think it's there.  this lacan, how desire functions in us (problematic us, i don't agree with ideologies that say us, or are spelled us, but spiritually, there is always the us at the beginning and the end, oh, that's such a problem, but it's not my problem), this afro-caribbean thing, how spells function, what trance does when accompanied by a proper (don't look into that word very far, i don't mean what i think you think it means) spell, they are similar, very similar, and can do things to performers in a state of trance, things that i want to talk about, but not here, not in an rdc2 way, not in a lit review way, in the methodology sections way, that's later, that's still coming, but the argument, i think, the argument is there, i think, and i know i like where it is.
so i'm waiting to hear if it reads the way i think it reads (it never will, but there are linguistic blueprints--how can you be saussure?--haha my favorite joke--there are blueprints of how we know things through words, and this writing, not this one here, the rdc2 one is the this here, this writing might fit with that in a way that makes sense to someone trying to decipher whether or not this is on the level).
too many ways to say what i want to mean.  what i think you want me to say.  what i want to want to say.  to say what i want to say.
oh but this: what i want: i don't want to pass, i don't want a degree, i want to be challenged, and earn a degree in the process (more precisely, i want to change my identity in the process, to learn how to think differently about what i do when i am making art, talking about art, learning about art). so far i am challenged very much so, yes, very much so, and i love this.

part 2.

dear diary,
i'm leaving on the 24th of june to spend four & a half weeks exploring europe with my mom and my daughter.
i'm packing and arranging a life here to move it there, but so much of it is left here.  that's how it is when you are in between places.
on august 6th heather is coming from paris to berlin.
this means that everyone at transart will get to meet the three most important women in my life.  i am very excited.
i am going to miss my dog, jake the dog.

part 3

dear diary,
we finished the show that makes up part three of the studio work.
the production was solid, but there were lots and lots of problems.  things that made it almost impossible at times to focus on the trance work.  i don't know how it worked, because i haven't interviewed the performers yet, that's still coming.  i don't know if i'll have interviews when i leave, they might have to be captured across borders, wirelessly.  but the audiences responded as if something very large and mysterious was happening, and i got to talk about my phd work in the press. we'll see how the rest of it turns out when we all get to talking about how the trance worked for them this time.
oh but there were some large problems that were beyond my control.
i can't talk about all of that here.
personal things about persons who are not me.
you know.

part 4

dear diary,
i am thinking about the next project.
not much, or not much that i have access to.  images and dreams and things that i don't quite have access to.  a room that's too dimly lit, where spirits are working out details for me, before they turn the light on.
i think brecht is right, people need to be able to smoke cigars and drink inside the theatre.  (i don't drink though, i tried it once and it went on for 20 years and was sort of messy, but you can drink, if you're lucky it's very nice, i wasn't so lucky).
there are inklings of the next piece though, and they are like this:
first, i have a production in seattle in october, and one in tempe in november, so i don't know when this will work, but i know it has to work somewhere in there.  that's a big part of my thinking about the next project, the logistics of time and schedules.  i wish it weren't so much about time and schedules, but oh, i don't want to have to keep rushing things like i have been.
i see a series of stations.  maybe this won't be in a theatre this time.  a remote location out in the middle of the desert would be best, but hard to do here, not for lack of space, but because there are too many people with guns in those spaces.
it's obvious that we have to do something about those people with guns.
so maybe this is in my house, and outside my house, where there are stations, not like stations of the cross, but stations that number 5 (because of oshun), 5 stations where there are 5 groups of performers, some groups of 2 or 3, some groups of one (the word group is not correct for a group of one, but language is all that we have, or rather, interpretation is all we have, based on desire, how we hear what we want to hear, how we hear what we think they want us to hear, based on magic, how words make things when they are put together in certain orders).
the 5 stations perform an act, or a scene, continuously, so that the spectators can walk through them in whatever order they choose, and end with an incomplete vision of the whole.
one station with media only where a narrator puts the viewer into a state of trance.
one station where performers interact with media, a film about their experience.
3 stations that are only performers, these performers are in a deeper state of trance than we've done so far in this monsters of the sea.
all stations are performers reflecting on an experience, an experience with some basic components: a restless night. an argument between a heart and a head.  falling into exhaustion finally and waking up hearing the dead singing.
this is about seeing, looking to see the world of the invisibles, and seeing something else instead.
an ecstatic rite that begins and ends with dancing.
that's all i can see right now.
love.
c

april-may: stutters (14 may 14)

this update is reporting on two things: like usual, writing and studio practice.

writing wise, i have finished the second draft of the rdc2 chapter, and am working on draft 3 of the rdc2 report.  will have notes etc from my advisors in the next week or two, and am planning on submitting by the end of may.  the chapter, losing the glossary and taking the form of a play, was a good idea, i think, it opened up everything for me.  it also helped me to put my advisors’ comments in a (dialogical) context, and i saw something in my writing that um i don’t want to talk about out loud but because i don’t want to i will.

i wrote a lot of words without saying anything, and see now that the first draft was in large part me thinking things through, but not very thoughtfully haha.  and it took all of this upfront work (which i didnt think at the time was work i wouldn’t use) in order to get to where i could articulate the main things i’m trying to articulate, that is: lukumi spells, palo charms, lacan’s desire, when put in place, in action, in rehearsal, have effects on the performers that seem very similar.  this i’ve said, but not so much in terms of how.  which part of the charm is like the subject, or object, etc etc., and suddenly i am seeing why some have had trouble understanding what i’m talking about, because i am not articulating what i know, but i didn’t know what i wasn’t articulating, and now i know.

so i am learning how to write.

in terms of the studio project.  yikes.  i formed a new theatre company with friends, and am not directing this time, so i can focus on the ritual parts of this, getting performers into trance, putting them under oshun & yemaya spells, etc.  however, the director tore a ligament and a tendon, lengthwise, and had to have surgery, and so i got to direct for a bit again.  and the actors have had staggered schedules so tonight is the first time we’ll all be together in the room at once.  and this: the space, we have a perfect space, but suddenly can’t get in touch with them, and they’re not answering any questions about moving in next week to open, so, we are not sure we have a space after all (this has not happened before, i’ve worked with this space lots of times and think the people are lovely), so.  these complications have meant that i’m not focusing on ritual and trance with the performers but am doing many things at once.  not ideal, but i suppose it never is, and, this one is focusing on the psychoanalytic mind, and a deep trance is not necessary, just a lightness of consciousness, a light state of otherworldliness and lots of discussion of projections and mirrors,  it will work, but not with as much documentation in the process as i wanted.

i’m guessing i’m not the only artist-researcher who has been frustrated, but at the time that it happens, it sure does feel like you’re the only one in the world.  we get to work through these things and find out what we found out after it’s all over and not a moment before xo

march-april: this is not here (16 apr 14)

This update is preoccupied with the things this update is writing about.

There is the work, the written work: oh this has already been written about, however, in the last 2 posts.  But.  To summarize, or rather, highlight:

I am reading two new books, The Claude Glass (history of the Black Mirror) and Phantasmagoria.  The latter is interestingly laid out, a structure for looking at the ‘more things in heaven and earth’  (wax, ether, air, etc.); the former seems to have a link for my methods, where the black mirror is something that catches the gaze (not in JL’s sense of gaze, to be clear), and the act of looking is power, so to take it away from someone is agency and authority and all those things.  I’ll write more on that later, I’m sure.

I have some new methods for collecting subjectivities (in a jar, haha), and my favorite one, the one I’m looking forward to, is interviewing analyst-style, not face to face.  Looking forward to seeing what I find, and next Sunday I start rehearsals for project #3.  Oh this is a busy month, mm hm.  But I know it’s been rough for you, too.

Next, dropping the idea of a glossary for the lit review, almost altogether but not quite, almost dropping Cortazar but not quite, and instead taking the form of a play, a dialogue between directors in a play, so that the discourses can argue amongst themselves, so that there is a fluidity and elasticity between them.

I finished draft 2 of the RDC2 report, and am in the middle (beginning of the middle, say, like on the early end of a beat) of writing draft 2 of the lit review.  Oh, this, these things, all with a very very big debt, I had a lot of help, a very big debt to my advisors.  Yes, very much.

Oh, and I have plane tickets to Europe.  This is all happening too soon, but exactly soon enough too.

xo

c

supervisory meeting p2 of 2 (11 apr 14)

met with Laura today on Skype.  Very fruitful.  The big questions centered around form and structure, I’m looking for central metaphors to guide this work, central metaphors that could dictate the form and structure of the work.  The Nkisi is still in my mind as a guiding poetic object, but the form that lets the reader in is Performance.  I’m still thinking through this in terms of how the rest of the chapters are laid out, but the literature review, instead of a glossary, will be a play.  I’m already writing in voices, and the problem I’m having is how the voices need to be able to speak to each other, and a play solves that.

The idea of a Rehearsal Director being the central narrator (which fulfills the same role the Lecturer does in Malcolm Ashmore’s The Reflexive Thesis).  Two assistant directors, a Santer@/Paler@, and a Lacanian.  Aha.  This will work.

In the next week I’ll be writing a revision to the RDC2 report, and in three weeks a new draft of this chapter, to allow for another round of revisions for a May submission.  Yes.

Other points:

To include my footnotes, I can’t use Harvard style, but, Laura suggests, Harvard style makes better writing, because we’re forced to focus.  I will do that then, because the form is playful enough to allow for side trips, but it needs to take the reader on a journey that’s not frustrating to follow (at least, not at the outset).

Also, need to include Mulvey (of course).

And more theatrical and other artistic sources throughout.  Again, the play format, where the setting is a rehearsal with a dialogue about the research questions, will make this not only easy, but really essential.

Finding out that so much of this writing is learning how to say what I know but haven’t spoken because it’s so much a part of my world that I don’t think to articulate it (but without these articulations, it doesn’t communicate what it really is).  And also finding out that so much of this is unknown, what is happening and what will happen when these notions are put to the test in the laboratory of art.